Changes in Australian community perceptions of non-communicable disease prevention: a greater role for government?
Anne C Grunseit1, Eloise Howse2, Erika Bohn-Goldbaum3
1The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Level 6, Charles Perkins Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia. anne.grunseit@sydney.edu.au.
Background:
Monitoring trends in community opinion can identify critical opportunities to implement upstream health policies or interventions. Our study examines change and demographic modifiers of change in community perceptions of government intervention for prevention of lifestyle-related chronic disease across two time points in Australia.
Methods:
Data were drawn from the 2016 (n = 2052) and 2018 (n = 2601) waves of a nationally representative cross-sectional telephone survey, 'AUSPOPS'. Survey questions gauged perceptions of government intervention for health in general, peoples'/organizations' role in maintaining health (e.g., parents, government) and support for specific health interventions (e.g., taxing soft drink). Bivariate and multivariate regression models tested for change between the two surveys, adjusted for demographic characteristics. Models with interactions between survey wave and demographic variables tested for differential change. One-tailed variance ratio tests examined whether opinions had become more polarized in 2018 compared with 2016.
Results:
The large, significant increase observed in the perceived size of the role that government has in maintaining people's health was uniform across demographic subpopulations. The role for employers and private health insurers was also perceived to be larger in 2018 compared with 2016, but the degree of change varied by gender, age and/or socioeconomic status. Support for some government interventions (e.g., taxing soft drinks) increased among specific demographic subgroups whilst exhibiting no overall change. Opinion was more polarized on general attitudes to government intervention for population health in 2018 compared to 2016, despite little change in central tendency.
Conclusions:
Opportunities may exist to implement government health-promoting policies (e.g., taxing soft drinks), although advocacy may be needed to address the concerns of less supportive subpopulations. Attitudes on government intervention in general may be becoming more polarized; future research examining the association of such changes with exposure to different information sources could inform communication strategies for future health policy change.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Levels of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention
In primary prevention, actions taken before disease onset prevent the disease from...
Models of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention II
The agent-host-environment model states that disease results...
Models of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention I
The health belief model (HBM) attempts to predict health-related behavior in specific belief patterns. According to the HBM, a person's...
Preventive Healthcare Services
Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...


